While the new epistemology and related models of therapy are claimed to have radical social implications, the Milan approach is in ill repute amongst feminists who see it as conservative in relation to women's issues. This paper explores the sociopolitical implications of the new epistemology and the Milan approach, concluding that, while second order cybernetics has greater potential to incorporate a radical social analysis, it has, nevertheless, failed to do so. The application of second order cybernetics in family therapy appears to be constrained by the sociopolitical conservatism of its proponents.
Three related models of therapy are often grouped together as the strategic therapies. These are brief therapy model associated with the Mental Research Institute, approaches developed by Jay Haley and Cloë Madanes, and the model developed by the Milan associates. Controversy exists, however, as to whether the Milan model should be included as a strategic therapy. It appears that the similarities among the three models can mask deeper differences, thus confounding the confusion. This paper contrast the models in their development, theory, and practice.
From a feminist perspective, the family therapy literature concerning incest fails to perceive the patriarchal context of abusive behavior and consequently blames the victim. This paper critiques the family therapy literature by drawing on the feminist discourse concerning incest. Several pervasive myths are identified: (a) that fathers and mothers are pathologically disturbed or inadequate; (b) incest is caused by separation and loss; (c) family isolation or a rigid external boundary explains incest; and (d) incest serves a function in maintaining family organization. By analyzing the contradictions arising from these polemical positions, we propose criteria for developing an adequate clinical account of incest.
The couple and family therapy literature has lacked clarity concerning different types of non-physical abuse, the relative severity of non-physical abuse and its impact on the target person. Non-physical abuse may be confused with relationship conflict or remain unrecognized by therapists when it occurs in the absence of physical violence. Building on research about the pernicious effects of non-physical abuse, this paper presents a framework to assist family therapists to identify non-physical abuse taking into account the length of time the abuse has been occurring, the intentions of the abuser and the impact on the victim. This framework conceptualizes first degree non-physical abuse as "verbal" abuse; second degree as "emotional" abuse and third degree as "psychological" abuse, the most debilitating form of all.
This paper aims to show how a trauma lens can be incorporated into existing family therapy practices, changing how therapists perceive presenting problems and therefore the issues and sites of intervention. After reviewing the family therapy literature concerning trauma and defining different types of trauma, the paper discusses how traumatic memories differ from ordinary memories. Ten principles for practice are described to guide therapists in integrating the trauma lens into their family therapy practice. Three case studies are used to illustrate these principles.
This paper, the third in a series concerned with family therapy in cases involving children at risk of abuse, describes an approach to maximising parents' interest and commitment to therapy. After overviewing the difficulties faced by therapists in working with parents who are notorious for their ‘resistance’, we provide guidelines for minimising the negative consequences of notification and for constructing therapeutic leverage in order to elicit and maintain parents' motivation throughout the course of therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.